No doubt proponents of CRT say or imply that but I doubt it's official. It really can't be do to CRT's reliance on social dominance theory. Once you accept SDT you're pretty much wed to the conclusion that people with black skin would have done the same to people with white skin given the circumstances and opportunity. For obvious reasons that's a talking point they'd rather avoid and consequently why the official line is advantage or privilege, rather than anything inherent.

It's just so crazy how these movements always form, a lot of outsiders look at it and go "Wow, this is very obviously a thin facade hiding some extremely bad ideas", and then some time later a bunch of people in the movement go "Wow, it's a total mystery how we've been taken over by the extremists".

Obviously it can't be the case that we were all right from the beginning, it must be that that things like the Alt-right morph somehow out of nowhere.

d2 is a hoot. Montey is okay but he's really a one trick pony.

Can I get the 'show' money ? (to continue with equine analogies)

They're pretty much just taking what we used to call Western Culture and calling it White Culture.

They're not actually wrong because the 'lazy Catholics' were looked down upon (still are really) by the Wasps for a century or two.

But saying only white protestants work hard is even more stupid for a non-white, non-protestant than it is when the white male protestant says it.

Broken links and links that reference themself.

I mean, we already know CRT exists and there are papers written based on it.

What do you think the actual effect of this rebranding of Western Culture as White Culture is going to have on society moving forward ?

Will it even make a difference ? White kids may not be as sheltered and insensitive as we were but that comes at the cost of hurting some fee fees.

And I get it. This is the fee fee generation. We must avoid anything that might lower our poor little fragile offspring's self esteem. (see what I did there?)

Well said.

How does God/the Church(or hell even kings or various other strongman wannabes) fit into your views against a 'central' power?

First we have to deal with the implications. It separates or segregates culture into racial categories. Or, more accurate, it separates white values and black values, as if they are different. It may surprise you, but black culture values are American culture values, or western culture values. Their are variances brought about because of environmental circumstances. However, the value systems are not distinctly different.

Let's examine it on something less contentious than shared values, and go back to food. Louisiana Creole cuisine is a style of cooking originating in Louisiana, United States, which blends West African, French, Spanish, Amerindian influences as well as influences from the general cuisine of the Southern United States. It's a matter of circumstance that people from Louisiana are exposed to stuff like boudin and crawfish, where as folks in the southeast are exposed to soul food which a lot of folks associate with black culture, but in reality it's a shared cultural legacy of both white and black folks in the south.

Yeah, it will make a difference. We know that viewing things through a racial lens leads to bad results. There are many shared values which is what makes up the melting pot of American/western culture. Those values are now being classified as white values, and values that promote white supremacy. Individualism and rationality being some of the prominent ones that are often pointed at. If you insist on classifying values/characteristics along racial lines, these values need to be put in the black column as well, but they want to make clear these are not "black values". As much they try to speak to what makes up being white, they are tactility saying what it means to be black. Or, more clearly, they are tacitly stating black people don't have these values.

When someone paints indivualism as white supremacy and someone values indivualism, you've created a conflict, and created an enemy. Especially when you are using the public education system to destroy/eradicate that value.


Further, not one person denies that some people still view things through a racial lens. Most people want to change that. CRT asserts we have to view the world through a racial lens, and that's it's impossible for a society to not have this racial conscious, so, therefore, we must embrace this racial lens. Viewing the world through a racial lens is at the core of racism. If you view the world through an identity based lens, it will lead to persecution based on identity. It doesn't matter if it's coming from journal papers written by critical race theorist, or mien Kompf.

I find it nearly impossible to believe you actually interact with any conservatives out in the wild.

Here--why don't we organize a little Republican get together and when ~99% white people show up you take the stage and give a speech about how they're all basically exactly the same(culturally etc) as black people and see how it goes

You're the CRT expert itt, but from my limited understanding they are classifying western values as white values in the context of the systemic racism that has existed since the founding of the republic.

For example, blacks have been shut out from enjoying wealth created by our economy for generations but the answer to that is 'individualism'. As if white people living in the same generational time frame didn't have a better shot at accumulating it.

It's just some arguments that may at times be silly based on the facts of racism in the US.

I'm not sure your slippery slope argument has any evidence to support it.

As you say, American blacks have adopted western values themselves. CRT isn't going to convince them to go back to tribal African culture since it's not what they grew up in. So....again, what's the big worry.

If it went to the extreme it would be just as bad as white supremacy of course. But I'm fairly sure it's not going to go that far. It's more of a rhetorical device to shake some rigid foundations that have been in place since the founding of the republic. I think we honkies will survive without too many pink marks.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who caught that. lol

This is like when a cop does a welfare check. He says all the right words at first but you know it's not going to end well somehow.

https://www.koco.com/article/cnn-rep...-shot/36569375

Those values (individualism and rationality, et al.) they identify for this purpose are not based on racism, and in many ways are the antithesis/antidote to racism. These values are what led to end of slavery, the CRA, et al.





Not that you're ever going to do this, but stop call conflating CRT with systemic racism. Critical race theory isn't simply highlighting systemic racism, it goes further than that. It actually redefines it, and attributes stuff to it that are contentious and unproven, such as individualism being a component of white supremacy.





Keep hand waving away lefty elite activist educating people that rationality is a white concept used to opress minorities, as if that's not going to create division. I guess you just don't get that proposition tacitly says black people are inherently irrational.

People who say this stuff she says, should be looked at with great skepticism.

She speaks generally and doesn't really talk about what those things mean, because what they mean is where the issues start arising. What makes her the arbiter of truth? She may not think she does, but her class is based on critical race theory, she talks about a dominant white culture, as evidence of her teaching about privilege. To many people that's asserting a racial superiority.

The issue with wokeness and wokesters is, they don't see their views as contentious or debatable. They assert them as these common, acceptable truisms, whereas really the only people who see it this way is a plurality of the left. A significant percentage of people don't buy into the concept of privilege as it's taught. She's oblivious to the fact these are contentious issues she's teaching these kids that really don't have a consensus in society, and are only supported through narratives and stories.

They are absolutely used to advance racist ideas. For a guy who's spend countless hours studying CRT you seem to be missing the basics.








lol Well, that's what you've been saying here. And I keep saying 'so what?'.



You are certainly free to draw any conclusions you like from whatever sources you're looking at. I'm not hand waving the silly or negative aspects away, I just don't see them as the immediate and deadly threat that you do. I just see it as shaking things up a bit.

Seriously, how do you think this ends ? In a race war like Manson predicted ?
Or does it just get tweaked until it's acceptable to the average, not too racist white and in ten years no one cares.

I mean, it's not like everyone doesn't know the country was built on racism anyway. Some are just upset it's being said out loud.

I agree. We should be skeptical of college professors in the deeply progressive state of Oklahoma, they might not even been around someone with an opposing point of view. I agree with legislatures using their political power to approve what should be taught and shouldn't, providing correctness of thought to college students even if that means canceling a few classes if it improves the culture.

I'm always a bit uncomfortable with the essentializing when people take the short cut to say "White supremacy is..... X" when one of the defining characteristics of white supremacy when it gets defined is its flexibility and instrumentalism. Irish and Italians weren't white until they needed to be. It would stand to reason that rugged individualism, when used to prop up white supremacy would be used so long as it's useful. So white supremacy isn't rugged individualism but rugged individualism can be used by white supremacy (or black nationalism or Native American separatism, or...etc) That is to say the concepts can become racialized, just like freedom and equality and everything else before it. The Southern aristocrats attempted to burnish the slave system and denigrate the free labor system of the North by appealing to the freedom that the slave system gave to white. Northern free labor was denigrated as wage slavery implying that poor whites in the North were no better than slaves and the North would be much better off (for whites) if they adopted the slave system. Freedom, contradictorily, became the justification for slavery.

The rugged individualism example that sticks out in in my mind the most actually happened during Obama's tenure when Obama talked about "they didn't build that" and Republicans replied back with "We built this". Having a room of nearly all white people chanting "we built this" while talking about the nation, it's not hard to draw see some racialization going on with it.

You see a lot of rural and conservatives define themselves as self sufficient and not needing the government help, as opposed to the inner city minorities all the time. The Clive Bundy example is the perfect distillation of this

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...off-as-slaves/

all the while getting a sweetheart deal on the grazing fees that he refused to pay.

Doesn't mean that rugged individualism is exclusively used in racial terms, it can be used in class terms as well. Rich people of all races and times have been telling poor people to pull up their pants and stop being lazy and mooching off society.

https://theweek.com/articles/448556/...ulture-poverty

I'm shocked that legislation that supposedly is fine because it only targets critical race theory has scoped creeped to mean forbidding of basic sociological concepts and instead of inviting horror at supposed government overreach is actually condoned and accepted.

Who could have seen this coming?

I'm not saying the legislation is fine. I agree it's an expected response. Lefty activist elites who have hijacked and decided to indoctrinate public school children for the purpose of, and I'm being charitable here, a sociological experiment based on narratives and storytelling was going to get blowback.

You start telling children the characteristics of whiteness and saying how those characteristics (stuff like rationality) are the underpinnings of white supremacy, you're going to get political action from voters who don't agree with that. While I don't support the legislation in principal but maybe the Lefty should have spoke up when this stuff started getting put in the public education and federal legislation, instead of hand waving it away as a conservative conspiracy theory.

That's not all...

The race-based policies in regards to the distribution of stimulus money in the name of racial equity (which has its root squarely) critical race theory, was also rejected by the court of appeals:

Source.

https://www.philasd.org/antiracism/
I'm not okay with that at all.

I don't know. Critical race theory didn't exist when people pushed for recompense for the Freedmen, for Reconstruction and for racial quotas in the 70s. If all these people were pushing for for what they believed would be a more equitable situation for minorities and did so before critical race theory existed how can we say that critical race theory is the source of the push for racial equity?

Seems fine. Out of multiple paragraphs the only sentence I have a problem with is that racism is the source of all other oppressions. Don't seem remotely true, but other than that seems like normal we don't like racism stuff.

A lot of the kids are probably pretty upset with the class cancelling.
Probably some of the easiest credits all summer

Obviously not all other oppressions but some of them believe that racism is the only thing keeping the proletariat from uniting to overthrow capitalism. So depending on how the terms are defined its range runs all the way to radical Marxism. I just have a hard time imagining what is meant by "racial equity" is that blacks won't be killed by police at a higher rate than whites, that impoverished blacks won't be any more impoverished than impoverished whites, etc.

But hopefully RFlush is right and their language will get parsed down to a level that white parents aren't feeling their children are being demeaned and politically weaponized against their wishes. If not, I suspect our educators might be in line for some reeducation in terms of their boundaries. There's a reason the creeping socialists crept.

I think individuality and rationality might be used as mechanisms for advancing racist ideas.

However, so is collectivism and subjectivity, and I'd argue the latter is wielded to greater effect when it comes to the most oppressive forms of racism, in other words the subjugation of groups (e.g., Uighurs in China).